TO BE STUDIED FOR THE FINAL TEST IN PHILOSOPHY

WINTER SEMESTER 2015/16

1.Introduction

*Philosophical domains:

Onthology: concerns being - what is to be?

Epistemology: concerns knowing – what can I know?
Metaphisics: concerns transcendence after life, soul, God (absolute Supreme king)
Briefly: abstract theory with no basis in reality
Ethics: concerns values
Aesthetics: concerns beauty

*Movements:

- dogmatism: the tendency to interpret principles as undeniably true, without consideration

of evidence or the opinions of others;

- skepticism: questioning attitude towards non-empirical knowledge or opinions/beliefs

stated as facts, or doubt regarding claims that are taken for granted elsewhere;

- solipsism: idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist

- idealism: view that stresses the central role of the ideal or the spiritual in the
interpretation of experience; the reality is fundamentally mental, mentally constructed, or
otherwise immaterial; idealism is skeptic about the possibility of knowing any mind-
independent thing. Benedict de Spinoza, Arthur Schopenhauer, George Hegel, Immanuel
Kant, Plato

- nominalism: the doctrine holding that abstract concepts, general terms, or universals have
no independent existence but exist only as names.

- materialism: matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all phenomena,
including mental phenomena and consciousness, are identical with material interactions.
Epicurus, Marx, Feuerbach

- realism: the modern philosophical doctrine, opposed to idealism, that physical objects exist
independently of their being perceived.
Bacon, Hume, Locke, Epicurus

- monism: a theory or doctrine that denies the existence of a distinction or duality in a

particular sphere, such as that between matter and mind, or God and the world; there are
no fundamental divisions, and that a unified set of laws underlie all of nature. Gottfried
Leibniz, Tales, Giordano Bruno

- dualism: a theory or system of thought that regards a of reality in terms of two

independent principles, especially mind and matter Plato, Marx

- empiricism: the theory that all knowledge is based on experience derived from the senses.
The view that all concepts originate in experience, that all rationally acceptable beliefs or
propositions are justifiable or knowable only through experience. Stimulated by the rise of
experimental science, it developed in the 17th and 18th centuries. John Locke, Francis
Bacon, David Hume, George Berckeley.

- determinism: the doctrine that all events, including human action, are ultimately
determined by causes regarded as external to the will. Some philosophers have taken
determinism to imply that individual human beings have no free will and cannot be held
morally responsible for their actions.
Democritus, Bertrand Russell

- nihilism: the rejection of all religious and moral principles, often in the belief that life is
meaningless; philosophy the belief that nothing in the world has a real existence) Friedrich
Nietzsche

2. Presocratics

*Presocratics’ key interests:

- matter
- basic elements
- cosmology (the science of the origin and development of the Universe)
- rational thinking vs. sense experience

Presocratics – the world was always there; the act of creation appeared later.
None of them resorted to sense experience (did not trust the body); everything deduced
using rational thinking.

*Terms: arche, logos, doxa, nous, reductio ad absurdum

Arché – the primary principle; a substance or primal element

Logos - the rational principle that governs and develops the universe; the divine reason
implicit in the cosmos, ordering it and giving it form and meaning

Nous – the mind or intellect; the faculty of intellectual apprehension and of intuitive thought

Doxa - a Greek word meaning common belief or popular opinion

Reductio ad absurdum - a method of proving the falsity of a premise by showing that its
logical consequence is absurd or contradictory

Premise - a previous statement or proposition from which another is inferred or follows as a

conclusion

*Thales: main ideas

The question: how did everything come about?

- the primary principle (arché) is water
- the Earth rests on water
- investigated astrology and mathematics
- “all things are full of gods”
- his attempt to explain nature by the simplification of phenomena and in his search for
causes within nature itself rather than in the caprices of anthropomorphic gods
- bridging the worlds of myth and reason
- freed phenomena from godly intervention, paved the way towards the scientific method

*The difference between the Eleatic and Ionian Schools (Zeno’s paradoxes)

Both Ionian and Eleatic schools studied epistemology – the knowledge of cognition.
The differences are as follows:
- the Ionian school believed in the motion and its importance (Heraclitus' “everything flows”
everything is in constant motion and changes all the time), while the Eleatics tried to prove
that the motion does not actually exist (Zeno's arrow paradox)
- the Ionian school believed that everything comes from water, while according to Eleatics
everything comes from earth
- the Ionian school used abstract reasoning to explain what the world is made of, while
Eleatics believed in, let's say, “rationalism” - they used purely intellectual reflections

*Zeno Paradoxes - statements made by the Greek philosopher Zeno of Elea designed to
show that any assertion (утверждение) opposite to the monistic teaching of Parmenides
leads to contradiction and absurdity.

Zeno paradoxes:
- Axilles and the tortoise
- Dichotomy paradoxes
- Arrow paradox
- Paradox of the Grain of Millet

*Pythagoras: main ideas

1) The soul & The body

- the soul is eternal, the body is mortal
- the soul can enter any body
- the soul is imprisoned in the body
- the purpose of the bodily life is to free the soul (transmigration of the soul)
2) The way of life
- strict regime, observance of religious rituals, moral discipline, self-control (eg.
maintaining silence)
3) Mathematical cosmology
- only numbers are real
- they define aperion, harmony of the spheres, perfect proportions, music-
mathematics

3. Socrates and the Sophists

*the differences between Socrates and the Sophists (what they thought about and how
they thought)

Sophists taught about politics, successful life, arête (excellence, virtue), rhetorics, and
argumentation skills. They believed that “man is the measure of all things” - there is no
absolute truth, there is an individual relativism. They taught mainly for money.

Socrates taught about justice, virtue (arête), knowledge and wisdom, the good (the
beautiful), and the truth. He believed that the man can not actually know anything (“I know I
know nothing”). His manner of thinking consisted of asking questions (cross-examination of
students by the teacher). He taught for free unlike Sophists.

*virtue and knowledge according to Socrates

Human wisdom begins with the recognition of one's own ignorance. Ethical virtue is the only
thing that matters (philosophizing is an ethical act). Once one knows what virtue is, it is
impossible not to act virtuously.

* Socrates’ apology: why did he think he should not be killed but appreciated?
Socrates claimed that he was truly the wisest man, because he knew that he knew nothing
and his duty was to question ‘wise’ men who were unaware of their ignorance. His irritating
manner of questioning and embarrassing them was supposed to serve as an awakening of
Athens to exist in a productive and virtuous way. He also warned juries of harming
themselves more than harming him.

 the Cynics and the Cyrenaics: main ideas

The Cynics - taking Socrates to the extreme

- against fortune, social convention (including family life), passion
- advocate living as close to Nature as possible
- unconventional way of life
 - training in austerity.
- outspokenness
- shamelessness (performing actions that were harmful to no one but unconventional
in certain circumstances)

The Cyrenaics – taking Sophist to the extreme

- pursuit of pleasure
- pleasure of the body is superior to mental one
- pleasure now and here
- no identity of the same experience for two men
- only present experience is valid

4. Plato

*Theory of Forms (appearance versus reality)

The theory of Forms asserts that non-material abstract Forms possess the highest and most
fundamental kind of reality. The material world of change known to us through sensation
does not possess it. The world of Forms (or Ideas) is perfect, while the world that we see is
just a pale reflection.

*the cave metaphor:

A gathering of people who have lived chained to the wall of a cave all of their lives, facing a
blank wall. The people watch shadows projected on the wall from things passing in front of a
fire behind them, and they begin to give names to these shadows. The shadows are as close
as the prisoners get to viewing reality. He then explains how the philosopher is like a
prisoner who is escaped from the cave and comes to understand that the shadows on the
wall do not make up reality at all, for he can perceive the true form of reality rather than the
mere shadows seen by the prisoners. He describes few levels of getting accustomed to
seeing things: fire, shadows, reflections in water, people, and finally the sun. The prisoner at
the first moment would for sure hate the new state because of the pain in his eyes. But then
he would love it. He would even come to the cave in order to free other prisoners, but he
would be blind there. They would also not know that they can be freed.

the chariot metaphor (concept of the soul):

Plato paints the picture of a Charioteer driving a chariot pulled by two winged horses: one of
them is noble and of noble breed, but the other quite the opposite in breed and character.
Therefore driving must be difficult and troublesome.
- The Charioteer represents intellect, reason, or the part of the soul that must guide the soul
to the truth.
- One horse represents rational or moral impulse or the positive part of passionate nature.
- The other horse represents the soul's irrational passions, appetites, or sexual desires.
The Charioteer directs the entire chariot (or soul), trying to stop the horses from going
different ways, and to proceed towards enlightenment.
*mimesis – the representation of nature as a model for beauty, truth and the good in
creation of works of art

anamnesis – the idea that humans possess knowledge from past incarnations and that
learning consists of rediscovering that knowledge within us

5. Aristotle

* matter and form according to Aristotle;

Body = matter
Soul = form
The body is necessary for a soul to exercise all vital capacities, since (almost) all vital
functions are the functions of body and soul together.
All objects are combination of matter and form.
The form is realized within the matter.
There could be prime matter (stuff that has no particular form and not arranged in any
particular structure).
Aristotle wondered whether something could have form and structure without having
matter. He proposed that something that has form and structure without matter is God.

* the four causes;

There are four causes behind all the change in the world.
Attempts to answer the why-questions.
These causes are closer to what we might call “explanations”: they explain in different ways
why the change came to pass.
1) the material cause: the substance from which we are made; physical properties of the
things which we can touch, see, taste and so on.
2) the formal cause: the substance gets into shape; structure or design of a being
3) the efficient cause: puts things the way it is; thing or agent which actually brings
something about; actual force that brings things together
4) the final cause: telos (“the end”); ultimate purpose for being

* the soul (vegetative, sensitive, rational)

1) vegetative soul (plants)
The vegetative soul is responsible for reproduction and growth.
2) sensitive soul (all animals)
The sensitive soul requires a body, since the acts of sensation and mobility require bodily
organs.
3) rational (human beings)
The rational soul is capable of thought and reflection.

* catharsis – the purification or relief of the emotions aroused in a tragic performance.

The process of releasing and relief from, strong or repressed emotions.

* terms
syllogism – a form of reasoning in which a conclusion is drawn from two given or assumed
propositions (premises).

major premise - the premise of a syllogism containing the predicate of its conclusion.
minor premise - the premise of a syllogism containing the subject of its conclusion.
Example:
Major premise: All mammals are warm-blooded.
Minor premise: All black dogs are mammals.
Conclusion: All black dogs are warm – blooded.

Major premise (mammals) predicates (“predicts”) features (warm-blooded) of minor

premise (subject of the sentence: black dogs).

Deduction - The process of reasoning in which a conclusion follows necessarily from the
stated premises reasoning from the general to the specific.

Telos (“the end”) – the purpose, predermination or potentiality of something which has to
be fullfiled and recognized. Humans are organised to live a certain way in order to be able to
achieve this goal. The life is the process of change from imperfect state to perfect one (eg.
An embryo becomes a baby), that's why telos is more important than the cause of the
beginning.

golden mean - a balance between extremes, i.e. vices; the happy medium

demiurgos (Unmoved Mover) – a subordinate god who fashions and arranges the physical
world to make it conform to a rational and eternal ideal; an agent who takes the preexisting
materials of chaos and produces all the physical things of the world, including human bodies.

6. Late ancient and medieval philosophy

* the influence of ancient philosophy (Plato’s Ideas);

The Platonic heritage:
- the world is a hierarchy of beings from the most to the least perfect
- the understanding of first cause is beyond human cognitive capasities
* Philo: main ideas
He combined philosophy with Judaism presenting Plato’s ideas as God’s thoughts, Logos as
Demiurgos, the Old Testament as the source of Logos. In his philosophical and religious
essays he proves that the world is uncreated and indestructible. Like Plato, Philo regarded
the body as the prison house of the soul. Perfect happiness comes not through men’s own
efforts to achieve virtue but only through the grace of God.

* Plotinus: basics (the One);

“The One” is the model of cosmic hierarchy.
The One (gr. hen-one): absolutely simple, without attributes, beyond all beings. It cannot be
understand through the process of discursive reasoning. Knowledge of the One is rather
achieved through the purely intellectual vision. The One is not, strictly speaking, a source or
a cause, but rather the eternally present possibility -- or active “making-possible” -- of all
existence, of Being.

* St. Augustine of Hippo: main ideas and theodicy

Augustine’s adaptation of classical thought to Christian teaching created a theological
system of great power and lasting influence. His numerous written works, the most
important of which are Confessions and City of God, shaped the practice of biblical
interpretations and helped lay the foundation for much of medieval and modern Christian
thought.

Confessions:
- religion is not the matter of intellect (faith comes before intellect, intellect follows
faith);
- searching for the ritual purity requires the rejection of sexuality;
City of God:
- setting up the City of God over and against the City of Man;
God: unchangeable, eternal, one
Being: changeable, temporal, complex
Father (creating) Son (created) HolySpirit (unifying)
Reason Episteme knowledge Will
Thinking Remembering Love

Summum Bonum - the principle of goodness in which all moral values are included or from
which they are derived; the highest good

Theodicy - explanation of why a perfectly good, almighty, and all-knowing God permits evil.
The term literally means “justifying God.”
Augustine’s theodicy – asking the question concerning evil
Free will: choosing between Summum Bonum and Bonum Uti.
Free Will Defence: moral evil is a result of our choices

* St. Anselm’s ontological argument;

Proslogion – ontological (referring to metaphysics and primal principles) arguments that God
exists:
1) God is that being than “which nothing greater can be conceived” (nothing is greater
than God)
2) In our minds we can clearly have an idea of God
3) If God exists only in our minds, not in the reality, it would not be the greatest being
that can be conceived
4) An imagined God cannot be greater than a real one
5) So, God must exist

* St. Thomas: main ideas and The Five Ways

Main ideas:
- reasoned, logical, technical argumentation
- employing Aristotelian method and terminology
- turning to the surrounding world and human being
- more pluralistic than total approach
- division of philosophy and religion (philosophy doesn’t have to serve religion)

*The Five Ways (Summe Theologica)

1) the movement (unmoved mover)
2) casual sequences (there must be a first cause for which you don’t need a cause)
3) the dependency of some things on others
4) comparing things on the scale if degrees (you have to have a point of reference which is
absolute)
5) things having a goal (you have to have a final absolute goal)

* terms
Apologist – any of the Christian writers, primarily in the 2nd century, who attempted to
provide a defence of Christianity and criticisms of Greco-Roman culture. Many of their
writings were addressed to Roman emperors, and it is probable that the writings were
actually sent to government secretaries who were empowered to accept or reject them.
Under these circumstances, some of the apologies assumed the form of briefs written to
defend Christians against the accusations current in the 2nd century, especially the charges
that their religion was novel or godless or that they engaged in immoral cultic practices.

Scholasticism – the system of theological and philosophical teaching predominant in the

Middle Ages, based chiefly upon the authority of the church fathers and of Aristotle and his
commentators.

Manichaeism:
1. The syncretic, dualistic religious philosophy taught by the Persian prophet Mani,
combining elements of Zoroastrian, Christian, and Gnostic thought and opposed by the
imperial Roman government, Neo-Platonist philosophers, and orthodox Christians.
2. A dualistic philosophy dividing the world between good and evil principles or regarding
matter as intrinsically evil and mind as intrinsically good.

7. Early modern philosophy

*the difference between early modern and medieval philosophy

What differentiates early modern philosophy from medieval philosophy is:

-philosophy separated from theology
-it challenged orthodoxy established by medieval philosophy
-a change of interests
-plurality of ideas
-interest in the human and the human-episteme-world relation

*Niccolo Machavelli; the basic idea

The ruler should rule by fear, not by love – love will not make people follow our orders.
Sometimes we have to sacrifice our ethics in order to achieve some higher goal, e.g. we
neede too act cruelly to ensure the integrity of the state.

*Thomas Hobbes; the basic idea

People are not good by nature. The sense of morality has to be imposed on them.
We must desire and seek peace.
We must give up a part of our liberty for that peace (that's what is called a social contract).
In order to make people keep the promise (of the social contract) there must be an absolute
sovereign – Leviathan (biblical name associated with enormous power) - that keeps people
in control.

*Rene Descartes

the Cartesian Doubt:

It was Descartes' method of philosophizing. He doubted everything that came to his mind. In
the end the only thing that reminded was human mind – he realized that there must be
something that doubts.

His doubting was like:

-senses – they often lie to us
-dreaming – while dreaming we are sure that it is reality, not a dream; how can we know
that we're not dreaming at the moment?
-fiendish demon – how can we know if something does not pervade my senses?
But there must be this thing that experiences those real or not real things. It is human mind.
Cogito ergo sum – I think, therefore I am.

Cartesian dualism:
Mind and body are separated. What really mattered for Descartes was mind.

*Blaise Pascal, basic idea:

Form Thoughts, 1670:
“The heart has its reasons that reason does not know.”

Pascal's wager:
He tried to prove that it pays off to believe that God exists and act according to His
commandments. “If you win [and God really exists], you win everything. If you lose [and God
does not exist], you lose nothing [you just lived a good life].”
According to Pascal, human being is like a “thinking reed”. “The greatness of human beings –
he says – consists in their ability to know their worthlessness.”
Human being is a meeting point between infinity of space and infinity of thoughts.

*Baruch (Benedictus) Spinoza

Spinoza's metaphysics consists of one thing, substance, and its modifications (modes). Early
in The Ethics Spinoza argues that there is only one substance, which is absolutely infinite,
self-caused, and eternal. He calls this substance "God", or "Nature". In fact, he takes these
two terms to be synonymous. For Spinoza the whole of the natural universe is made of one
substance, God, or, what's the same, Nature, and its modifications (modes).

Modes are particular modifications of substance, i.e., particular things in the world. Spinoza
gives the following definition:
By mode I understand the affections of a substance, or that which is in another
through which it is also conceived.

*Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz

Major works: Theodicy (1710), Monadology (1714).

According to Leibniz, we live in the best of possible worlds. We can't see it because we are
limited in our cognitive capacity.
Monad is the most basic particle of reality. In the world we have a huge number of them;
they do not communicate with each other but at the same time they are in a perfect
harmony – they are constantly developing. All of them are heading towards even if some of
them are lagging behind.
Reality is a process of monads going conscious.

*Francis Bacon, the basic idea of Idols

“The human intellect is like a distorting mirror which receives light-rays irregularly and so
mixes its own nature with the nature of things which it distorts”

1) Idols of the Tribe – false concepts which are due to human nature → the structure of our
understanding
2) Idols of the Cave – all things that you believe in, hold dear, but you can't prove
3) Idols of the Market Place – exchange of rumours, gossips → false ideas that you get by
means of human communication
4) Idols of the Theatre – knowledge that comes with previous generations → why do people
believe in false beliefs (idols)

*John Locke, tabula rasa

According to Locke, at the moment of a birth human mind is free of any ideas, it is a “clean
slate” (tabula rasa). It gets ideas in the processes of growing, learning, while being a part of
culture – this clean slate is being “written” with words and sentences.

*George Berkeley, esse est percipi

According to Berkeley, to be is to be perceived (esse est percipi). The only reason why the
world exists is that God (or the world itself) is perceiving it all the time.

8. The Enlightenment

* main ideas of the Enlightenment philosophy;

- the mathematics can solve everything
- individual liberty
- belief in reason based on experience (reason is the measure of truth)
- religious tolerance
- belief in progress

* Rousseau: noble savage, self love and love of self, social contract, the reason for
inequalities;
Social contract - a voluntary agreement among individuals by which organized society is brought into
being. The natural or individual will are changed into the general will – when your personal needs are
replaced by needs which come from your position at the society. The general will is essential for truly
democratic society, others the lack of it will cause and legitimize inequality.
A social contract is an agreement between the people of a state and the
government of a state. The people agree to follow certain rules made by
the government. These rules are usually called laws. Laws help to make
sure people have rights and that their rights are taken care of. One kind
of social contract is a constitution.
Noble savage – in literature, an idealized concept of uncivilized man, who symbolizes the
unity with nature not exposed to the corrupting influences of civilization.

Self love and love of self – self-love is similar to care for yourself, but love of self is
selfishness, greed
Amour-propre (French, "self-love") is a concept in the philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau
that esteem depends upon the opinion of others. Rousseau contrasts it with amour de soi,
which also means "self-love", but which does not involve seeing oneself as others see one.
According to Rousseau, amour de soi is more primitive and is compatible with wholeness
and happiness, while amour-propre is an unnatural form of self-love that arose only with the
appearance of society and individuals' consequent ability to compare themselves with one
another. Rousseau thought that amour-propre was subject to corruption, thereby causing
vice and misery
Amour de soi (French, "love of self") is a concept in the philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau
that refers to the kind of self-love that humans share with brute animals and predates the
appearance of society. Acts out of amour de soi tend to be for individual well-being. They
are naturally good and not malicious because amour de soi as self-love does not involve
pursuing one's self-interest at the expense of others. The sentiment does not compare
oneself with others, but is concerned solely with oneself as an absolute and valuable
existence.

The reason for inequalities – After analyzing the evolution of human nature over the
centuries Rousseau stated that as soon as human began to socialize and live in groups, the
phenomena of amour-propre appeared, which drives men to compare themselves to others,
and to need to dominate others in order to be happy. The invention of property and the
division of labor represent the beginning of moral inequality. Property allows for the
domination and exploitation of the poor by the rich. The political society began to invent
laws establishing inequality, persuading people that this is the natural order of things. The
physics inequality was replaced by moral inequality.

* Hume: Hume’s fork, critique of causality;

1) Hume's Fork:

Hume divided knowledge into what he termed "relations of ideas" and "matters of fact".
Relations of ideas are what we have been calling analytic truths or a priori knowledge (a
priori = taken for granted/nie podlega wątpliwości). These are such things as "All bachelors
are unmarried", "2 + 2 = 4", etc. These are certain in as much as we cannot conceive of them
being otherwise. Matters of fact, however, can be falsified. I may say, "The sun will rise
tomorrow" (which is extremely likely) - but is not impossible that it will not.

2) Critique of causality:
Hume argued that all our knowledge of cause and effect came through habit. So, for
instance, if we see the Sun rising it is not because it corresponds to some eternal and
unchangeable law, but because we have seen it rise countless times. Therefore, the more we
have experienced things, the more certain they will be. For Hume, cause and effect is
nothing more than habitual perception.

* Kant

cognitive faculties:
1) senses (time and space are necessarily a prior condition of sensibility);
2) intellect (perception of things);
3) reason (postulates and interpretations)

the beautiful vs. the sublime

The beautiful is something apparently attractive, the sublime attracts us mysteriously and
inexplicably. Kant argues that our judgment of beauty is a subjective feeling, even though it
has a universal validity.
The beatiful: form, pleasure, being perfect, representation, serene contemplation;
The sublime: no form, pleasure and pain, being too much, no representation, tornement.

Kant’s phenomenology
Things as they are know and experienced through the senses; as they appear to the
observer.
Kant’s noumena
“thing-in-itself” Kant claimed that due to human nature people are never able to see things
as they are, they can see only their appearance.

Kant’s postulates:
1) God;
2) Freedom;
3) Immortality.
According to Kant a postulate is theoretical proposition which is not demonstrable, but
which is a result of a priori (unconditionally valid) law. These postulates are practical and
functional, because they are necessary for the obedience to the moral laws (consciousness
and “natural” existence).
Kant’s antinomies
Kant wanted to show that the inadequacy of pure reason causes contradictions between two
beliefs that are in themselves reasonable (thesis and antithesis).
- the world has / doesn’t have the beginning in time and limits in space;
- there is / is no freedom;
- everything in the world is / is not simple or it is / is not part of something simple.

Categorical Imperative -
an absolute, universal moral law which is followed regardless of context. It states that one
should act in such a way if he wants his action to become a universal law applicable to
everyone in a similar situation and that one must strive to treat others, as he wants to be
treated himself.
a priori/a posteriori

a priori knowledge which comes purely from reasoning, independent of experiences and
typically applied to analytic proportions, which are true simply by virtue of their meaning
e.g. all bachelors are unmarried.

a posteriori knowledge which comes purely from experiencing alone and typically apllies to
synthetic propotions, which makes claims beyond that e.g. all bachelors are happy.

9. German idealism
* Hegel: Hegel’s phenomenology, dialectic (thesis-antithesis-synthesis), master/slave
dialectic, alienation;

Subjective-Objective-Absolute Spirit
1) Subjective Spirit – individual consciousness
2) Objective Spirit – consciousness of the state
3) Absolute Spirit – self-knowledge of the spirit

The Head of State is surrounded by courtiers and cultured elite. To be

invited into this company requires the utmost discipline in courtesy,
education and achievement. Only self sacrifice, strenuous effort, in
Hegel's word, alienation, can become cultured. Only a few can attain
ALIENATION CONSCIOUSNESS.
Obviously, Hegel's definition of alienation is different from Marx'
definition, the alienation of the worker from the means of production. For
Hegel, alienation is the extra work needed to raise an average person to
a high level of culture. But culture, to the average person, seems remote
and unreachable, hovering over and humiliating the average person.
Those who pass through the fire of alienation rise to the cultured class, as
opposed to the average class. A new class rises to bridge the gap
between the two classes, the professional class of advisors, doctors,
educators and so on, to meet the average class half way.

A thesis can be seen as a single idea. The idea contains a form

of incompleteness that gives rise to the antithesis, a conflicting
idea. A third point of view, a synthesis, arises from this conflict.
It overcomes the conflict by reconciling the truths contained in
the thesis and antithesis at a higher level. The synthesis is a new
thesis. It generates a new antithesis, and the process continues
until truth is arrived at.
10. Karl Marx
* Feuerbach: materialism
Ludwig Feuerbach being a materialist claimed that only material things exist and material
comes first before ideas. He even materialized religion saying that people invent ideas of
God and eternal soul to simply feel better i.e. ideas are projections of people’s need and
their inward nature.

* Marx: base and superstructure, dialectical materialism, class struggle, false

consciousness, commodity fetishism, alienation;

Base and Superstructure

Base is everything that is connected with the economy; all things needed to be produced
(machines, factories, lands, raw materials)
Superstructure is connected with culture; everything not to do with the production in the
society (ideology, education, family, traditions, literature).
Base is a dominant pattern which comes first and defines superstructure. Economic
conditions determine cultural appearance (for example, the appearance of the cinema is
rooted in base that due to economic conditions workers were able to go to the cinema now,
because they had more free time).

Dialectical materialism
There is a constant struggle between the oppressing and the oppressed which provokes
changes (revolution or elimination) in the society. Various examples can be provided to show
that this fight is continuous (Rome and barbarians, China and Tibet, bourgeoisie and lumpen)
and due to the spiral of time it is going to repeat again and again.

Class struggle
The struggle for political and economic power carried on between capitalists and workers.

Commodity fetishism
Perceiving a bought object as if it appeared by itself being unaware of people’s labor used
for the creation of this product; considering them as if they were main, regulating factor not
only of the relations between products, but the relations between people; replacing people’s
relationships by the product “relationships”.
Commodity – any product at the market.

When we look at products, we don’t see the people created them, we just see the
objectified products. Material relations between people become social relations between
things. When you buy a phone, you don’t know the history of this phone, if it was a legal
work or not, if someone was abused or not, etc. You buy a whole process of the phone
creation, but you don’t know this. The price of the phone doesn’t reflect the price of people
labor, but the value of this product.

The False Consciousness

The proletariat is perceived their situation as natural, because it doesn’t the mechanism of
capitalism and takes their doomed situation for granted.
The consciousness doesn’t determine people’s being, but, on the contrary, their social being
determines their consciousness.
The social being: food, clothing and life conditions.

Alienation
Proletarians are alienated from the joy of working and from the result of his work. Marx
believes that only meaningful and enjoyable work fulfills your life with sense. The owner of
the factory is only interested in the profit you can bring, you mean nothing as a human
being, because you can be easily replaced.

11. Quotes and ideas to know and understand:

Heraclitus: No man can cross the same river twice, because neither the man nor the river
are the same.
Everything is within a continuous motion, the world changes permanently. The change is
universal and the stability is an illusion.

Parmenides: For it is the same thing that can be thought and that can be.

Protagoras of Abdera: Man is the measure of all things.

The individual being is the ultimate source of value and there is no absolute truth only the
individual relativism.

Socrates: I know that I know nothing.

Human cannot know anything and the true wisdom is the awareness of one’s ignorance.

Descartes: I think therefore I am.

Descartes tries to find truths for knowledge. He is skeptical about his previous believes and
questions everything. Even if all his believes are wrong his ability to doubt them serves as a
proof of his existence. The fact that he can think is what assures himself of his own
existence, and a deceiving god cannot negate that.
Berkeley: To be is to be perceived.
The reality does not exist outside our perception of it, everything what surrounds us is our
mind-dependent interpretation of it, an idea of our mind and a brain perception.

Machiavelli: [The prince] must not mind incurring the scandal of those vices without which
it would be difficult to save the state.

Pascal: The heart has its reasons that reason does not know.
This line demonstrate one of the biggest human confusion whether to govern your action by
the firmness of mind or the tenderness of heart. The reasoning of the heart is so dominant
sometimes that it ignores the rationality of the world.

Pascal: If you win, you win everything, if you lose, you lose nothing.

Leibniz: This is the best of possible worlds.

Hegel: The owl of Minerva flies only at dusk.

Marx: Philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways. The point, however,
is to change it.

Marx: A spectre is haunting Europe – the spectre of communism.

Schopenhauer: The world is my will and representation.

12. You should be able to provide names that go under the labels: masters of suspicion (why
are they called this way?); and at least one name for: realism, empiricism, idealism, monism,
determinism, materialism, nihilism, dualism (and understand why they go under those
names) -> look at the philosophical movements;

Masters of suspicion: Friedrich Nietzsche, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freud.

These thinkers always regard with suspicion to people’s conscious understanding and
experiences, our knowledge is just an illusion. They promoted atheism considering religion
as a clutch, opium for people.
Friedrich Nietczche – the will to power
Karl Marx – the economical power
Sigmund Freud – the omnipresent sexuality